Economic Impact of 60% Naturism Adoption on
Key Industries (Developed World)
Scenario: Assume a cultural shift where 60% of the population in developed economies adopts
naturism (routine social nudity). This would dramatically reduce demand for clothing and related products,
alter beauty norms, and relax dress codes. Below we estimate the annual economic losses for 10 affected
industries, comparing current 2025 impacts to a 2035 outlook. We distinguish direct losses (lost industry
revenue/profits) from indirect losses (supply-chain and employment impacts, downstream effects). All
estimates use available market data and reasonable assumptions (explained per industry). Monetary
f
igures are in USD.
1. Fashion and Apparel Industry
1
2
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: The apparel industry is a cornerstone of developed economies – globally
it’s worth about $1.84 trillion in 2025 . Developed markets (U.S., Europe, Japan, etc.) comprise roughly
half of that (e.g. the U.S. alone is ~$365.7 billion ). If 60% of people stopped wearing clothes regularly, we
assume at least a 50–60% drop in apparel demand across developed countries. Naturists would only buy
minimal garments for necessity (weather, special occasions), eliminating most fashion-driven purchases.
This translates to an annual revenue loss on the order of $400–500 billion (2025) for developed-world
apparel retailers and brands (roughly halving the sector’s size). Direct losses include reduced sales of
everyday clothing, high fashion, footwear, and accessories.
3
5
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Directly, apparel companies would see revenues plunge and many stores would
close. Employment would also be hit hard – worldwide about 430 million people work in fashion and
textile production , and a large share of these jobs serve developed-market consumers. A naturist shift
could render millions of retail and garment-manufacturing jobs obsolete. Indirectly, upstream suppliers like
fabric mills, cotton growers, and textile chemical producers would lose business. For example, the global
textile market (worth ~$760 billion in 2025) would shrink significantly as apparel accounts for ~55% of
textile demand . We estimate indirect losses (supplier revenues, logistics, marketing services
supporting fashion) in the tens of billions. There would be spillover effects on advertising, real estate (mall
vacancies), and even tourism in fashion capitals.
4
2035 Outlook: Over a decade, the apparel industry would contract and then stabilize at a new lower
equilibrium. By 2035, naturism might plateau at 60% adoption or even grow. Traditional fashion companies
would either pivot to serving the remaining 40% (perhaps focusing on niche high-end clothing or exports to
non-naturist regions) or go out of business. We project a further slight decline in apparel revenue post-2025
(perhaps an additional 10% loss by 2035) as older inventories are unwound and more people embrace
minimal wardrobes. Estimated 2035 losses for developed markets: on the order of $500–600 billion
annually in direct sales (assuming no major recovery in clothing demand). Indirect losses could improve
somewhat if firms repurpose factories to produce other textiles (e.g. technical fabrics) or if job markets
adjust, but core clothing supply chains would remain depressed. In summary, a sustained naturist majority
means the fashion/apparel sector in developed economies would be less than half its previous size for the
1
foreseeable future – a loss of economic activity worth hundreds of billions per year, and a profound
employment impact in retail and manufacturing.
Methodological notes: We assumed naturist consumers cut their apparel purchases by ~90%, leaving only
10% for essentials. 60% of the population doing so (~60% drop in volume) with some residual spending by
naturists yields ~50–60% overall revenue loss. This is applied to developed-market industry value. Forecast
assumes little rebound, with any growth coming only from the non-naturist minority or new markets.
<table><tr><th>Fashion & Apparel Losses</th><th>Estimated 2025</th><th>Projected 2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Direct revenue loss (developed world)</td><td>$450 billion (≈55% of pre-naturism market)</
td><td>$500 billion (further slight decline)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect losses (supply chain, jobs)</
td><td>$100–150 billion (textiles, materials, etc.)</td><td>$120 billion (persistent, some adaptation)</td></
tr> <tr><td>Jobs impacted (global supply chain)</td><td>100+ million at risk (of 430 million )</
td><td>100+ million (many jobs permanently shed)</td></tr> </table>
3
1
Sources: Global apparel market size ; U.S. apparel market ; textile market share .
2. Beauty and Cosmetics Industry
6
2
4
5
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: The global beauty and personal care industry is about $450 billion in
2025 , with developed markets accounting for a large portion (North America and Europe are major
consumers of cosmetics). Naturism’s ethos of embracing natural appearance would significantly dampen
demand for makeup, skincare designed for cosmetic effect, perfumes, and other beauty products
especially those used to cover perceived “flaws” or enhance sexual attractiveness. We estimate naturist
consumers (60% of people) might reduce their spending on beauty/cosmetics by roughly 80% (many
naturists forego heavy makeup and elaborate grooming, though basic hygiene and sunscreen use would
remain). This equates to about a 50% drop in overall cosmetics sales (0.6 × 80% reduction ≈ 48%).
Developed-world beauty companies could lose on the order of $100–150 billion in annual revenue by
2025 due to this shift. Direct losses would hit makeup (color cosmetics) and fragrances hardest, as these are
often used to project an image while clothed. Segments like skincare and toiletries might see smaller
declines, since naturists still need soap, shampoo, toothpaste, etc., though they may opt for simpler, natural
products.
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Direct losses include revenue declines for cosmetics manufacturers, luxury
beauty brands, salons, and cosmetic retailers (e.g. Sephora, department store beauty counters). Many
beauty-product companies would downsize or consolidate. Indirectly, suppliers of ingredients (chemical
companies producing pigments, fragrances, etc.) would see reduced orders. Marketing and advertising
industries would lose beauty advertising spend. Notably, employment in the beauty sector (from R&D
chemists to makeup artists and retail staff) would shrink. However, some areas could pivot – for example,
naturists might emphasize wellness and skincare for health over cosmetics, so companies making
sunscreens, moisturizers, and natural skincare could retain some demand. Overall, we anticipate indirect
economic losses in the tens of billions: e.g. advertising media that rely on beauty ads lose revenue, and
fewer cosmetology jobs are needed.
2035 Outlook: Over the next decade, the beauty industry would restructure toward a “natural beauty”
paradigm. We project further contraction in traditional cosmetics through the late 2020s, then stabilization
2
by 2035 at perhaps 50–60% below the pre-naturism market size. Forecast 2035 losses: roughly $120
140 billion/year less revenue in developed markets than business-as-usual. Some segments may partially
recover or reinvent themselves – for instance, companies might market low-key products aligned with
naturist values (e.g. organic skincare, subtle grooming products). This could create modest growth within
a smaller market. Indirect losses (supplier industries, advertising) would likewise persist but attenuate as
the industry finds a new balance. Employment would shift: fewer makeup sales reps, but possibly more
focus on wellness (nutrition, fitness, etc.). In summary, by 2035 the beauty business in naturist-majority
societies might be roughly half its original size, with a focus on health and maintenance rather than
cosmetic enhancement.
Assumptions: We assume 60% of consumers largely stop using non-essential cosmetics, causing ~50% drop
in total sector sales. Remaining 40% continue as normal. We account for some increased spending on
necessities (e.g. naturists might buy more sunscreen due to increased skin exposure, partially offsetting
losses). The 10-year forecast assumes companies adapt with limited success and no reversal of naturist
trends.
<table><tr><th>Beauty & Cosmetics Losses</th><th>Estimated 2025</th><th>Projected 2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Direct revenue loss (cosmetics sales)</td><td>$120 billion (≈50% decline)
6
</td><td>$130 billion
(market ~half of pre-shift size)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect losses (suppliers, advertising)</td><td>$20
30 billion (packaging, chemicals, media)</td><td>$15–25 billion (some supply-chain adaptation)</td></tr>
<tr><td>Jobs impacted</td><td>Tens of thousands (retail, beauty services)</td><td>Persistent lower
employment in cosmetics sector</td></tr> </table>
Sources: Global beauty market ~$450 billion
dramatically cut cosmetics use.
6
(McKinsey, 2025). Estimates assume naturist consumers
3. Plastic & Cosmetic Surgery Industry
7
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: Cosmetic surgery and procedures (including minimally-invasive treatments
like Botox) have become a sizable market. Global cosmetic procedure revenues were around $60 billion in
2024 (surgical + non-surgical). In developed countries, high disposable incomes and beauty ideals drive
most of this demand. A widespread naturist mindset – emphasizing body acceptance and de-emphasizing
appearance perfection – would likely cause a sharp decline in elective cosmetic procedures. Many people
undergo surgeries (e.g. breast augmentations, liposuction, nose jobs) due to social beauty standards and
the desire to look better in clothes or by conventional norms. If 60% of the population becomes comfortable
with their natural bodies, we assume at least a 50% drop in demand for cosmetic alterations. Thus, by
2025, clinics in developed regions could see revenues fall by roughly $25–30 billion annually relative to
status quo (about half the market vanishing). The number of procedures would plummet accordingly
currently about 35 million aesthetic procedures are performed worldwide per year , and this could
drop by tens of millions. Direct losses hit plastic surgeons’ fees, clinic revenues, and device/pharmaceutical
sales (e.g. implants, fillers).
8
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Directly, practitioners (surgeons, dermatologists) would face fewer clients;
many boutique cosmetic surgery centers might close. The remaining demand may come from the 40% non
naturists or cases with functional/medical motivations. Indirectly, the supply chain for cosmetic procedures
would shrink. For example, manufacturers of breast implants, Botox producers, laser device makers, and
skincare product lines (for post-surgery care) would sell less. There would be less employment for operating
3
room staff, aesthetic nurses, and even ancillary businesses like medical tourism. However, not all effects are
negative in a broader sense – some resources (surgeons’ time, hospital facilities) might shift to
reconstructive or medically necessary surgeries. The indirect economic loss can be estimated in the
single-digit billions annually: e.g. reduced demand for medical supplies, and loss of hospitality revenue
from cosmetic surgery tourism (many patients travel for affordable procedures). Some highly specialized
locales (e.g. clinics in Beverly Hills or Miami) would see local economic impacts (job losses, lower real estate
demand in medical office spaces).
7
2035 Outlook: Over 10 years, the cosmetic surgery industry in naturist-majority societies would contract
dramatically and possibly reinvent itself. By 2035, we project the market to be 30–40% of its original size
(i.e. a 60–70% reduction in revenue versus pre-naturism). Annual losses by 2035 might reach $30–40 billion
compared to the baseline growth path (since without naturism the industry was actually growing ~3–5%
annually ). Some segment of the population will always pursue aesthetic enhancements, so the industry
wouldn’t disappear entirely – it would cater to a smaller clientele, possibly focusing on more “natural look”
procedures or reconstructive work. Technological advances (e.g. safer non-invasive treatments) might
also attract even some naturists (for health-related or minor appearance tweaks), providing a floor to the
decline. Indirectly, related industries (cosmetic dentistry, high-end beauty spas) would also see prolonged
lower demand. Overall, by 2035 we’d expect a leaner cosmetic surgery sector serving niche needs, with far
fewer big cosmetic clinics.
Assumptions: We assume a ~50% immediate drop in demand for elective cosmetic procedures among
naturists, reflecting increased body acceptance. This leads to ~50–60% revenue loss in developed markets.
We also assume no major regulatory changes (e.g. the industry remains legal and available, just less
sought-after). The forecast accounts for some ongoing demand from non-naturists and a possible cultural
shift where even naturists who do choose procedures opt for subtle enhancements, keeping part of the
industry alive.
<table><tr><th>Cosmetic Surgery Industry Losses</th><th>Estimated 2025</th><th>Projected 2035</th></
tr> <tr><td>Direct revenue loss (clinics, surgeons)</td><td>$25 billion (≈50% of 2025 market) </
td><td>$35 billion (industry ~1/3 of original size)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect losses (devices, pharma,
tourism)</td><td>$5–10 billion (implants, injectables sales down)</td><td>$10 billion (persistent low
demand for supplies)</td></tr> <tr><td>Procedures reduction</td><td>~15 million fewer procedures/year
(global)
8
8
</td><td>20+ million fewer vs. no-naturism trend</td></tr> </table>
7
7
Sources: Global cosmetic surgery market ~$57 billion (2024) ; ~34.9 million aesthetic procedures in 2023
. Assumes naturism halves demand for elective procedures.
4. Pornography & Adult Entertainment
9
10
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: The adult entertainment industry (encompassing pornography, adult
f
ilms, erotic websites, sex-oriented live entertainment, etc.) is significant – estimated around $58 billion
globally in 2022 . (Definitions vary; some analyses put it higher when including all erotica, sex toys, etc.,
up to ~$200+ billion .) Developed countries are the largest markets for porn consumption and adult
content revenue. Widespread naturism would alter this landscape in complex ways. On one hand, nudity
becomes commonplace and demystified, potentially reducing the allure of pornographic material that
relies on the novelty of naked bodies or sexually suggestive imagery. With fewer social taboos around
nudity, some consumers might lose interest in “softcore” content or pay less for adult magazines, strip
4
clubs, or voyeuristic media. However, pornography is also driven by sexual acts and fantasy, not just
nudity. It’s possible that overall porn usage could decrease somewhat if people become more open in real
life sexuality (or more fulfilled socially), or it might shift toward more niche content. We conservatively
estimate an initial direct revenue loss of ~30% for pornography by 2025 in naturist-dominant societies.
This means adult content producers could lose on the order of $15–20 billion annually versus the status
quo. For instance, businesses like pay-per-view porn sites, subscription platforms (e.g. OnlyFans creators),
and strip clubs may see declining patronage as the general public’s curiosity about the naked body wanes.
The sale of explicit magazines/DVDs (already waning) might virtually end.
11
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Direct losses would hit adult film studios, online porn platforms, strip clubs,
and adult pay-per-view services. Some performers and content creators would lose income as demand
softens. Indirect losses: Part of the adult industry’s value comes from advertising on free sites, affiliate
marketing, and related tech services (payment processing, etc.). With reduced traffic or willingness to pay,
those revenue streams shrink. There’s also a secondary effect on the sex toy and accessory market, which
is often grouped with adult entertainment – interestingly, sex toys currently make up a large share of adult
industry revenue (around 60% in 2022) . Naturism’s impact on sex toy sales is ambiguous: on one hand,
a more open sexual culture could normalize the use of such products, potentially sustaining sales; on the
other, if people are more sexually satisfied socially or less voyeuristic, they might not seek as many aids. We
suspect any boost in sex-positivity is outweighed by a decline in the “edginess” that drives some to consume
explicit content. Thus, indirect losses (e.g. fewer sex toys sold, less content production employment,
decline in adult advertising revenues) might be on the order of $5–10 billion annually in developed
markets. Additionally, some mainstream media that profited from sexual content (like cable TV adult
channels) would lose subscribers.
2035 Outlook: Over a decade, the porn/adult entertainment sector would adjust but likely remain
substantial. By 2035, we might see a 20–40% contraction in the industry’s size in naturist-majority
regions. Annual revenue in developed markets could be ~$20–30 billion lower than it would have been
without naturism. The industry may pivot to more immersive or specialized offerings to retain interest (e.g.
interactive or VR experiences, fetish content beyond simple nudity). It’s also possible a cultural
normalization of sex reduces shame and could increase some consumption – for instance, couples might
more openly use adult media or toys. But on balance, we expect normalization to reduce the profitability of
pornography: when something is no longer taboo, it’s harder to charge premium prices or attract
clandestine spending. Indirectly, by 2035 the surrounding ecosystem (advertising networks, production
studios) would downsize accordingly. Some adult content creators might diversify into more mainstream
entertainment or other jobs as the market contracts. On the other hand, not all is loss: governments might
save on enforcement costs related to obscenity, and societal attitudes towards sex work could become
more accepting, perhaps integrating some adult entertainment into mainstream platforms (albeit likely at
lower margins). In summary, the pornography/adult entertainment industry would still exist in 2035 but
leaner and less pervasive in monetizing sexuality, having lost a significant fraction of its previous economic
scale.
Assumptions: We assume a moderate decline in demand due to loss of novelty – not an outright collapse,
since sexual content still has appeal. A 30% initial revenue drop is assumed, with some stabilization later. We
also assume the 40% of people who aren’t naturists continue consuming as before. Sex toy segment impact
is treated as mildly negative or neutral. The forecast doesn’t account for any legal changes (we assume porn
remains legal and accessible).
5
<table><tr><th>Pornography & Adult Entertainment Losses</th><th>Estimated 2025</th><th>Projected
2035</th></tr> <tr><td>Direct revenue loss (adult content)</td><td>$18 billion (≈30% industry decline)</
td><td>$25 billion (industry ~70–80% of prior size)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect losses (ads, toys, clubs)</
td><td>$5–10 billion (lower ad spend, club rev.)</td><td>$10 billion (continuing lower demand)</td></tr>
<tr><td>Adult
industry
value
(post-loss)</td><td>~$40–50
td><td>~$50 billion/year (with niche focus)</td></tr> </table>
9
11
billion/year
in
new norm </
9
Sources: Global adult entertainment ~$58.4 billion (2022) ; industry estimates vary widely . Sex toys
~60% of revenue . Figures assume reduced demand due to nudity normalization.
10
5. Religious Institutions with Strict Dress Codes
12
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: Certain religious institutions in the developed world require adherents to
follow strict dress codes or modest attire (examples: some ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities,
conservative Christian denominations, traditional Islamic congregations, Mormon temple garments, etc.). If
60% of society embraces naturism – a practice fundamentally at odds with strict dress requirements – these
institutions would face declining membership and participation, especially among the naturist majority.
It’s difficult to put an exact dollar figure on “industry” losses here, as religious organizations are nonprofits
measured by donations and economic footprint. For context, donations to religious organizations in the
U.S. alone were about $143.5 billion in 2022 . A significant portion of that goes to churches/sects that
emphasize modest dress. If naturism causes many adherents (and potential converts) to leave or avoid such
religions, those groups’ incomes from tithes and offerings could drop sharply. We estimate by 2025 there
could be a 20–30% decline in donations to strict dress-code religious institutions in developed countries.
This implies on the order of $10–20 billion less annual funding for these organizations (e.g. evangelical
churches, orthodox communities) versus a baseline scenario. Direct losses include not only reduced
monetary contributions but also fewer volunteer hours and lower attendance (which can affect revenue
from events, schools, etc. run by these institutions).
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Direct impact – religious bodies might have to close or consolidate some
houses of worship due to dwindling attendance, leading to lower spending on church operations, staff
salaries, construction of new facilities, etc. Some faith-based schools with uniform requirements might see
enrollment fall (or have to relax dress codes), potentially losing tuition revenue. Indirect losses: If
congregations shrink, businesses that cater to them also suffer. For example, makers of religious attire (like
veils, habits, skullcaps), religious bookstores, and modest-fashion retailers would lose customers. The
“modest fashion” industry, which in some communities is significant, would contract (though this overlaps
with apparel losses discussed earlier). There’s also an economic effect on communities – areas with a large
fundamentalist population might experience reduced economic activity if those communities shrink or
isolate from naturist society. Another indirect aspect is that religious organizations often fund charities,
schools, and hospitals; with less income, their contributions to social services might drop, which is a social
loss albeit hard to monetize. Overall, indirect economic losses could be in the low billions annually – for
instance, less demand for religious conferences, retreats, or tourism (pilgrimages) if many former faithful
turn secular/naturist.
2035 Outlook: Over 10 years, religious institutions with inflexible dress codes would face a stark choice:
adapt or continue to decline. Some may soften their stances to retain members (allowing more liberal
dress or separate naturist-friendly congregations), but those that don’t could see membership collapse by
2035 in developed regions. We project that by 2035, many of these groups could lose 50% or more of their
6
2025 membership, corresponding to similar drops in funding. Annual losses by 2035 might reach
$30+ billion in reduced donations and economic activity associated with these institutions. This essentially
represents a transfer of human capital out of strict religious environments into secular or more liberal ones.
There could be positive offsets: naturist adopters might donate their time and money elsewhere (to secular
charities or more permissive spiritual communities), so the net effect on overall charitable giving might be
smaller. However, for the institutions in question, the direct economic footprint (e.g. church construction,
sales of religious items) would be much smaller. Indirectly, industries catering to religious strictures
(modest apparel, kosher/halal businesses if tied to insular communities) might diminish if those
communities integrate with broader naturist society. We anticipate that by 2035 the concept of enforcing
dress via religion in developed countries will be niche, thus those economies built around it contract
proportionally.
12
Methodology: We used U.S. religious giving as a gauge and assumed a significant fraction relates to
denominations likely to conflict with naturism. We then estimated membership/donation drops in that
fraction. This is an approximation; actual impact varies by country and religion. We assume naturism
adoption correlates with secularization (people choosing naturism likely drift from strict religious
observance).
<table><tr><th>Religious Institutions (Strict Dress) Losses</th><th>Est. 2025</th><th>Proj. 2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Donation/Revenue
loss</td><td>$15
billion
(20–30%
drop
in
contributions) </
td><td>$30+ billion (50%+ drop for strict groups)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect economic loss</td><td>$3
5 billion (modest fashion, services)</td><td>$5–10 billion (further decline in related markets)</td></tr>
<tr><td>Membership impact</td><td>Shrinking congregations (especially youth)</td><td>Many strict
congregations halved or dissolved</td></tr> </table>
12
12
Sources: U.S. religious giving ~$143 billion (2022) . Assumes naturism causes major defection from
dress-code-centric faith communities.
6. Advertising & Media Exploiting Sexualized Imagery
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: “Sex sells” has long been a mantra in advertising. A considerable share of
ads and media content in developed countries leverages sexualized imagery – e.g. provocative photos in
commercials, hyper-sexualized branding, click-bait content featuring scantily clad models – to grab
attention. Studies have shown that by the early 2000s, 20–27% of magazine ads contained sexual
imagery
13
14
(especially in industries like alcohol, beauty, fashion). In a society where nudity is normal and
not taboo (60% naturist), such strategies would lose impact. Consumers would likely become desensitized
to sexual cues, and overtly sexual ads might no longer provide a competitive advantage (or could even be
seen as tone-deaf in a culture emphasizing naturalness). Consequently, companies might pull back on
spending for sexually charged advertising. The global ad industry is enormous (~$1.1 trillion by 2025)
, so even a small shift in strategy can move big dollars. If we assume, say, 10–15% of advertising
campaigns in developed markets rely heavily on sexual appeal (either in imagery or innuendo), and half
of those dollars are reallocated or lost due to naturism, that implies roughly $50–80 billion less advertising
spend directed at sexualized content in the near term. This doesn’t mean companies stop advertising – they
might simply market differently (highlighting product features instead of bikini models). However, media
channels that specifically thrive on sexualized imagery (e.g. certain racy magazines, some billboards, “lads’
mags”, or clickbait websites) could see direct revenue losses because advertisers withdraw. By 2025, we
7
estimate these direct losses in developed markets to be on the order of $10 billion+ in media/ad revenue
that evaporates (as campaigns using sex appeal are cut or toned down).
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Directly, media outlets and advertising firms that specialized in sexualized
content would suffer. For example, television networks airing suggestive ads might lose those clients,
magazines like Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition could see sales decline, and agencies known for edgy
campaigns might lose accounts. Some brands (lingerie, perfume, nightlife) built on sexy marketing would
have to overhaul their image or lose market share. Indirectly, there are employment and creative impacts:
models who primarily did sexy shoots may find fewer gigs; photographers, stylists, and production crews
for such campaigns would see reduced work. Additionally, industries that banked on sexualization to drive
interest (like certain reality TV shows, music videos, etc.) might lose viewership and ad money, affecting the
broader entertainment sector. On the flip side, advertising might shift to other themes (humor, family,
health), so advertising spending might not drop overall by the full amount – rather it’s reallocated. The loss
is concentrated on those who cannot easily adapt (e.g. niche “lad magazines” could fold). An indirect
positive: fewer hyper-sexualized ads could lead to a slight cultural shift in body image pressure
(complementing naturism’s acceptance), potentially reducing demand for some “shame-based” products
(see fitness/wellness below).
2035 Outlook: By 2035, we expect advertising to have largely adapted to the naturist norm. The industry
as a whole may still be huge (even growing with the economy), but sexualized content would be a much
smaller fraction of it. The concept of exploiting scantily-clad models for shock value might feel outdated.
We forecast that any initial dip in ad spending (from campaigns that simply don’t work anymore) would be
offset as firms pour money into new tactics. Thus, by 2035 the net “loss” to the advertising sector might be
minor – advertising budgets will still be spent, just differently. However, certain sectors could effectively
disappear: for instance, print magazines that relied on erotic imagery might be gone or transformed. A
portion of the $1+ trillion ad market might permanently shift away from content that objectifies people. If
we estimate that by 2035 perhaps 10% of prior ad expenditures are permanently redirected, that could
equate to ~$100 billion globally (with developed markets comprising a big slice) no longer flowing through
the old channels. That is money not exactly “lost” to the economy (it’s likely spent on other marketing
means or returned to consumers as savings), but it is a loss to media companies that failed to pivot.
Indirectly, jobs centered on producing sexualized imagery (certain modeling agencies, adult content
marketing) would remain sparse. In summary, the advertising/media industry’s total size might not
shrink dramatically (it follows overall economic growth), but the subset of it that trades on sexual
appeal will have shriveled by 2035, with those revenues and jobs either disappearing or shifting into new
forms.
13
Assumptions: We assume naturism makes nudity and sexuality less effective as an attention-grabber, leading
advertisers to cut back on that approach. Estimates of 10–15% of ads using sex appeal are based on
research and industry observations; not all spending is eliminated, some is reallocated. We assume
companies don’t reduce budgets wholesale but find alternative marketing angles.
<table><tr><th>Sexualized Advertising/Media Losses</th><th>Est. 2025</th><th>Proj. 2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Advertising spend retracted/redeployed</td><td>$50 billion (global campaigns shift focus)
</td><td>$100 billion (permanently shifted from sexualized channels)</td></tr> <tr><td>Direct media
revenue loss</td><td>$10–15 billion (adult/“sexy” media ads lost)</td><td>$5 billion (few remaining outlets,
largely gone)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect impact</td><td>Fewer model/photography jobs for erotic ads</
td><td>Industry fully adapted; “sex sells” niche small</td></tr> </table>
13
14
8
14
Sources: ~1.1 trillion global ad spend 2025 ; ~20% of ads used sexual content in 2000s . Assumes
major reduction in use of sexual imagery in marketing due to nudity normalization.
13
7. Textile Manufacturing Sector
4
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: The textile manufacturing industry supplies fabrics and materials for
clothing, home furnishings, and industrial uses. In 2025, the global textile market is valued around
$760 billion , with fashion/apparel consuming over half of that (approx. 55% in 2024) . A 60% naturist
adoption in developed nations means a drastic drop in demand for textiles for clothing. With far fewer
garments being produced, orders for fabrics (cotton, wool, polyester, etc.) would shrink accordingly. We
estimate textile production for apparel could decline ~50–60% to mirror the apparel industry’s fall. This
translates to a direct hit on textile manufacturers on the order of $200–300 billion globally in 2025.
However, not all of that is strictly “loss” within developed economies – much textile manufacturing (e.g.
spinning, weaving) happens in developing countries. But developed-world companies (and consumers)
drive that demand. Developed countries’ textile industries (where they still exist, like specialty mills in
Italy or technical textile producers) would see significant contraction in the apparel segment. Direct losses
would include fewer orders for fabric, yarn, and dyes destined for clothes. For example, mills producing
denim or jersey knit for mass-market clothing might close lines, and chemical companies selling textile dyes
would see sales drop.
5
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Direct losses in textiles include revenue declines for fiber producers (cotton
farmers, synthetic fiber plants) and fabric mills. Regions heavily involved in textile export (e.g. South Asia)
would feel the brunt in absolute job losses, but within developed countries, any remaining textile mills
(often high-end or specialized) would scale back. Indirect losses: There’s a wide supply chain tied to textiles– agriculture (cotton farming communities losing income), petrochemicals (for polyester and nylon), textile
machinery manufacturers (less demand for looms, sewing machines), and logistics providers (shipping bulk
textiles). If 60% fewer clothes are being made, freight companies ship less fabric and clothing around the
world. We could also count the opportunity cost to fashion tech and innovation – less R&D investment in
new fabrics if the market contracts. On the flip side, some textile capacity might shift to other uses:
industrial textiles (45% of market) like medical textiles, geo-textiles, etc., could become more
important for textile firms, partially compensating. But those segments may not absorb all idle capacity. We
estimate indirect losses in the tens of billions: e.g. cotton producers in countries like the U.S. might
receive lower prices, affecting rural economies; the global cotton market (which was valued ~$38 billion in
2023 for raw cotton lint) would likely shrink.
5
2035 Outlook: By 2035, the textile manufacturing sector would have undergone consolidation. We
anticipate the industry worldwide might be, say, 30–40% smaller than it would have been without
naturism – largely due to the sustained drop in apparel textiles. Annual output losses in 2035 could be on
the order of $250+ billion (relative to baseline growth projections). Surviving textile firms would likely focus
on sustainable and technical textiles (since naturism aligns with minimalism, there could be emphasis on
durable, multipurpose fabrics and on serving other industries). Some developing economies reliant on
garment exports might diversify as clothing orders decline. Indirectly, by 2035, resource use implications
are notable: less textile production means less water, dyes, and energy used – a positive environmental side
effect (the industry would use fewer resources, possibly helping nations meet climate goals). But
economically, countries like Bangladesh or Vietnam (major garment/textile exporters) would have seen
slower growth or needed to pivot their workforce to other manufacturing. In developed countries, small
niche textile companies (e.g. heritage wool mills or luxury fabric producers) might survive by catering to the
9
remaining clothing market (perhaps the 40% non-naturists or overseas markets) but would be producing at
lower volume. Net employment in textiles would drop globally (millions fewer low-wage textile jobs, which is
socioeconomically significant for developing regions). By 2035, the textile sector in developed regions
might primarily serve non-apparel needs or high-end niche fashion, having lost the mass-market volume.
Assumptions: We tie textile losses to apparel declines. If apparel demand falls ~54% (as earlier estimated),
textile demand for apparel similarly falls, roughly halving the apparel-textile market. Industrial/housing
textile demand stays normal or grows slightly, cushioning total decline. The forecast assumes naturism
remains prevalent and no new large markets emerge to soak up the excess textile capacity.
<table><tr><th>Textile
Manufacturing
Losses</th><th>Est.
2025</th><th>Proj.
2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Global textile output loss</td><td>$250 billion (apparel fabric demand down) </
td><td>$270–300 billion (persisting lower clothing output)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect losses (agriculture,
logistics)</td><td>$20–30 billion (lower cotton, chemical sales)</td><td>$25 billion (continued lower raw
material demand)</td></tr> <tr><td>Note</td><td colspan="2">Most textile job losses occur in developing
countries (exporters), though caused by developed world demand drop.</td></tr> </table>
4
4
5
5
Sources: Global textile market $760 billion (2025) ; ~55% for apparel . Assumes ~50% reduction in
apparel-related textile demand.
8. Swimwear and Lingerie Industry
15
16
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: Swimwear and lingerie are apparel sub-sectors that would be especially
hard-hit by naturism. If public and recreational nudity is acceptable, swimwear becomes largely
redundant – naturists would swim and sunbathe nude rather than buy swimsuits. Likewise, many naturists
may forgo lingerie and undergarments; women might not wear bras or fancy lingerie when they embrace
body freedom (except perhaps for functional support or rare occasions). The global swimwear market is
relatively small (about $22 billion in 2025 by one estimate ) and the lingerie market is larger (estimates
range widely; roughly $80–100 billion in 2025 globally for women’s lingerie including everyday
underwear). In developed countries, per-capita spending on these is high. With 60% of people not using
these items, we anticipate sales drop roughly proportional to that population share – i.e. at least a 60%
revenue decline in each category. In practice, the drop might be even greater for fashion-driven segments
(e.g. bikinis and luxury lingerie could see ~80–90% collapse in demand, since naturists have little need
for decorative garments). For 2025, we estimate direct revenue losses about $13–15 billion in swimwear
sales (out of ~$22B, since most naturists won’t buy swimsuits) and on the order of $50 billion in lost
lingerie sales (if roughly half the $85–100B market vanishes). These are global figures; focusing on the
developed world, the impact is concentrated where usage is highest – e.g. Europe and North America have
large swimwear markets (beach tourism, pools) and lingerie markets (high spend per woman). Many brands
(Victoria’s Secret, etc.) could see revenues plummet.
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Direct losses: Companies that specialize in swimwear (from mass brands to
niche bikini designers) would face massive revenue shortfalls and likely shutter or pivot to other apparel.
Lingerie retailers would close stores; lingerie sections in department stores would shrink. Some product
lines (e.g. seasonal swim collections) would be canceled entirely. Indirect losses: The ripple effects include
reduced demand for related materials – e.g. spandex, Lycra, lace, and other specialized fabrics used in
swimwear and underwear. Textile mills producing stretch fabric or lace (often in developed countries like
France for luxury lingerie, or in Asia for mass production) would lose business. Marketing channels like
10
swimsuit catalogs or lingerie fashion shows (the famous Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show, for instance) would
cease, affecting advertising firms and media that covered them. There’s also an employment impact: many
jobs in design, sewing, modeling, and retail sales tied to these segments would disappear. However, some
naturists might still require basic undergarments for certain settings (for example, they might wear
underpants for hygiene under outer clothes when they do dress, or women with larger busts might
occasionally wear a supportive bra during exercise). So not all underwear sales vanish – likely the basic,
comfortable underwear segment remains to some extent, whereas the lacy, aesthetic lingerie segment is
largely lost. Similarly, competitive or athletic swimming might still use swimsuits (one wouldn’t compete
nude in international sports due to regulations), so athletic swimwear brands could retain some niche
(though small). These nuances mean a portion of production might survive in a reduced form.
16
2035 Outlook: By 2035, swimwear and lingerie as fashion industries would be shadows of their former
selves in naturist-majority societies. We project ongoing sales to the non-naturist 40% and for limited
functional uses, resulting in perhaps 20–30% of previous market size remaining. Annual losses by 2035
relative to baseline: likely $60+ billion combined (e.g. the global lingerie market might have grown to
~$150B by 2035 without naturism ，but instead it might stagnate around $50B, a $100B difference;
developed-world share of that difference could be tens of billions). Swimwear might survive as a niche
(competitive swim gear, sun-protective swim clothing in places where required) but mass consumer
demand for fashion swimsuits will not return as long as naturism prevails. Many iconic swimwear and
lingerie brands will either refocus on the remaining customer segment or diversify (for instance, some
lingerie companies might shift to comfy loungewear or unisex basics, if those are still worn). Indirectly, by
2035 the supply chains for these garments would have downsized – factories retooled or closed, and
material suppliers moved on to other products. A positive side-effect: less waste from fast-fashion bikinis
and cheap lingerie, which are often disposable; the environment might benefit from reduced textile waste
and microplastics (swimwear often being synthetic). Economically, regions famous for these industries (e.g.
parts of Asia producing intimates, or Miami’s swimwear market) would have seen a decline and needed to
pivot to other industries. Overall, by 2035 we’d see swimwear and lingerie being specialty items rather
than mass consumer goods in developed countries, reflecting a permanent economic downsizing.
Assumptions: We assume 60% of people completely stop buying swimwear and significantly reduce
underwear purchases, while 40% continue normally. Some minimal continued demand among naturists (for
practical underwear, competitive sports) is included. The forecast assumes naturism remains at 60% and
cultural norms don’t swing back.
<table><tr><th>Swimwear
& Lingerie Losses</th><th>Est. 2025</th><th>Proj. 2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Swimwear sales loss</td><td>$13 billion (≈60% of $22B market)
16
15
</td><td>$15+ billion (market
largely gone in naturist regions)</td></tr> <tr><td>Lingerie sales loss</td><td>$50 billion (≈60% of ~$85B
market)
</td><td>$60–70 billion (market ~1/3 of potential size)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect losses</
td><td>Less demand for lace, elastic (~$5B)</td><td>Contraction of supply chain persists (~$5–10B)</td></
tr> </table>
15
16
Sources: 2025 swimwear ~$22B ; lingerie ~$84.7B in 2025 . Assumes ~60% volume drop proportional
to naturist population for each.
11
9. Security & Surveillance for Dress Code Enforcement
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: In the developed world, enforcing dress codes is a relatively niche
“industry,” but it does entail real costs. Examples: security staff at clubs or restaurants ensuring patrons
meet dress standards, school administrators enforcing uniform policies or decency rules, and police or
bylaw officers addressing public indecency. If naturism becomes mainstream and social/ legal norms adjust
to accept nudity, most of these enforcement activities would vanish. There would no longer be “no shirt,
no service” rules to police, nor indecent exposure laws applying to simple nudity. Many institutions would
simply drop their dress code requirements, saving the effort and expense of enforcement. The economic
loss here is essentially the reduction in demand for any services or technology whose sole purpose was
dress code compliance. In 2025, this is not a separately quantified market, but we can discuss components:
For instance, the global private security industry is huge (~$259 billion in 2024) , but dress code
monitoring is a minute fraction of that (most is guarding property, personnel, etc.). We estimate that
eliminating dress code enforcement yields cost savings on the order of a few billion dollars globally
in 2025, which from one perspective is a “loss” of business for those who provided those services. For
example, some fraction of the work done by bouncers, school disciplinarians, or human resource managers
(in setting attire policies) becomes unnecessary. If we put a number, perhaps $1–2 billion annually in labor
and equipment devoted to dress-code enforcement could be reallocated or cut (for developed countries).
This includes things like reduced hours for security guards at upscale venues (since dress screening is
gone), and no need for surveillance systems aimed at catching dress violations (such systems are rare, so
minimal loss there).
17
18
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Direct impact is the reduced spending on personnel and systems specifically
for enforcing dress rules. For example, some tourist sites or religious places that currently pay guards to
ensure visitors dress modestly would no longer need those roles. Dress code infractions that currently incur
f
ines (adding to local government revenue) would cease – a minor revenue loss for municipalities, offset by
saving court and police resources. Indirectly, there’s overlap with other industries: the school uniform
market (~$30 billion by 2025) would shrink if schools allow naturist students to attend without
uniforms, meaning less surveillance of uniform compliance. (That is more a loss to the apparel industry,
already covered.) Another indirect effect: Freed from uniform or suit requirements, some electronic
surveillance (like workplace badge systems that also check attire) might be simplified, though this is
marginal. On the employment side, some security staff might lose jobs or shifts – e.g. a nightclub might
need one fewer doorman if they’re not screening attire. However, those staff often serve multiple roles (ID
checks, safety), so they’d likely remain employed, just with one less duty. In schools, teachers would spend
less time on dress code discipline, but that “saves” their time (which can be redirected to teaching) rather
than creating a clear economic loss. Overall, the indirect economic effect is more about efficiency gains
(time saved) than traditional loss. One could argue that efficiency is a positive, but from an industry
perspective, the niche of dress code enforcement shrinks – e.g. fewer sales of “Dress Code Compliance”
signage, or no need for companies that produced things like workplace dress code manuals.
2035 Outlook: By 2035, with naturism normal, formal dress code enforcement is practically nonexistent
in developed societies. This means any businesses that did revolve around it are gone. For instance, if any
companies offered consulting on dress code policy (some HR firms do this), that service line would vanish
a tiny loss in the consulting sector. Quantitatively, the ongoing “loss” might be in the low billions globally
(essentially the forgone spending on unneeded enforcement). Society will have reaped these savings
permanently. The private security industry by 2035 might be even larger overall (due to other security
needs), but a component like “morality policing” will be zero in naturist-friendly law. Police forces would
12
reallocate resources that might’ve gone to indecent exposure calls – minor in scale but real. For context, in
some jurisdictions indecent exposure is a small portion of arrests; those would approach zero (except for
truly lewd acts). We foresee no negative economic spiral from this – rather, those resources are freed
up. Thus, by 2035, one could say this “industry” has lost essentially 100% of its prior raison d’être in
naturist areas. In dollar terms: if we estimated, say, $5 billion worldwide spent on various dress code
enforcement in 2025 (very rough), by 2035 it might be near $0 in the developed world. Indirectly, a subtle
effect is on the security technology sector: for example, the market for surveillance cameras or AI systems
that detect dress norm violations (if any were emerging) would not develop. But these are more speculative
and not mainstream in 2025 anyway.
Assumptions: We assume public nudity becomes legal/tolerated, so enforcement isn’t required. We treat lost
enforcement costs as economic “losses” from the provider side (less demand for security services). The $1
5 billion figures are rough extrapolations given lack of direct data – considering the size of security industry
and the small share related to attire.
<table><tr><th>Dress Code Enforcement Losses</th><th>Est. 2025</th><th>Proj. 2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Direct spending cut (security/monitoring)</td><td>$1–2 billion (personnel & admin costs saved)</
td><td>$0.5 billion or less (nearly eliminated)</td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect impact</td><td>Marginal (time
savings for staff, etc.)</td><td>Marginal (benefit: resources fully reallocated)</td></tr> <tr><td>Examples</
td><td>Nightclub dress checks, school uniform enforcement</td><td>Formally not needed anywhere in
developed world</td></tr> </table>
17
18
Sources: Global private security $258.7B (2024) – dress enforcement is a tiny subset. School uniforms
~$30B in 2025
(would drop if naturism extends to schools).
10. “Shame-Based” Fitness and Wellness Industry
20
19
Baseline & 2025 Loss Estimate: The fitness, diet, and wellness sector is huge, but a substantial part of it
profits from people’s body insecurities and “shame” – e.g. programs promising a “beach body,” weight
loss products fueled by appearance anxiety, cosmetic fitness trends, etc. The global weight loss and
management market is about $300 billion in 2024 and projected to grow rapidly. Gym and fitness
clubs add another $100+ billion . Not all of this is shame-driven (much is for health), but a significant
fraction of consumer spend is motivated by the desire to look better naked or in revealing clothes. If
naturism becomes common, paradoxically, it could have two effects: (1) Greater body acceptance – people
might feel less shame and pressure to attain “perfect” bodies, reducing demand for extreme diets, quick-fix
weight loss schemes, and appearance-centric fitness services. (2) Visible bodies – on the other hand,
knowing one will be seen naked might motivate some to stay fit; however, naturist culture traditionally
encourages acceptance over judgment, so we lean toward overall less toxic pressure. On net, we expect a
decline in the “shame-based” subset of this industry. By 2025, as naturism catches on, consumers could
start pulling back from products that essentially sell “get rid of your shame.” For example, fad diet
programs, slimming teas, cellulite creams, “waist trainers” and cosmetic fitness classes (like bikini
bootcamps) might see fewer takers. We estimate an initial 10–15% reduction in spending on weight loss
programs and diet products in developed markets relative to trend, due to a chunk of the population
embracing a more relaxed attitude about their bodies. That could be on the order of $30–50 billion in
direct revenue loss in 2025 (since the weight loss market was ~$297B in 2024 , a significant slice of
which is from developed countries). Additionally, sales of shapewear (slimming undergarments) – a
market about $5 billion in 2024 – would drop sharply, since naturists won’t wear Spanx or corsets (with
19
21
13
clothes or without). The fitness industry might see fewer purely vanity-driven memberships (though health
conscious memberships remain). So high-end boutique fitness studios that trade on promise of a sculpted
physique could lose clients. In sum, by 2025 we might see direct losses of perhaps $50–70 billion across
various companies (diet product makers, slimming apparel, certain supplements and cosmetic fitness
services).
Direct vs. Indirect Impact: Direct losses hit companies like commercial diet plans (Weight Watchers
memberships might fall), cosmetic supplement makers (fat-burner pills, etc.), and certain influencers or
trainers whose business model is making people feel insecure then selling a solution. Equipment like home
scales or body-measure apps might sell a bit less. Indirectly, if fewer people are chasing rapid
transformations, related medical procedures (already counted in plastic surgery) drop, and even media that
pushes “ideal body” images (like some reality shows, fashion media) lose influence. But there could also be
positive indirect effects: with more reasonable fitness goals, people might shift spending to genuine
wellness (e.g. yoga for mindfulness rather than for abs, spending on nutritious food rather than diet pills).
That money doesn’t vanish but is redirected. However, sectors like the dietary supplement industry,
especially those selling dubious weight-loss pills, would shrink – impacting supplement manufacturers and
retailers. That industry was valued at tens of billions; if a chunk disappears, factories produce less, jobs in
that sector go away. Another indirect aspect: healthcare might see reduced revenues from treating weight
related issues if overall approach to health changes (though this is speculative and long-term). For now, we
consider primarily the commercial side. There is also overlap with other categories: shapewear decline was
partly covered under lingerie; fitness club changes might be offset by other motivations (many still exercise
for health or fun, not just looks).
19
2035 Outlook: By 2035, we anticipate a cultural shift in the wellness industry in naturist-majority
societies. The narrative will likely move from “transform your body to meet an ideal” to “take care of your
body for health and enjoyment.” As a result, the industries that thrived on body shame will have
contracted significantly. We might forecast that the weight loss/diet industry in developed countries is,
say, 30–40% smaller than it would have been otherwise. For example, instead of growing to $590B+
globally by 2033 as predicted , it might grow much slower or plateau in naturist regions. Annual lost
potential revenue by 2035 could be $100+ billion. This doesn’t mean people stop trying to lose weight
but the approach might be more health-centric (often cheaper, relying less on commercial programs).
Companies selling meal replacements, appetite suppressants, “miracle” gadgets, etc., could largely fade.
Shapewear might nearly disappear or remain only for the non-naturists; perhaps <20% of its current size.
Gyms and fitness clubs will still exist but may market themselves differently (focus on fun, community,
strength for daily life), potentially at slightly lower membership levels among naturists (who might prefer
outdoor group activities or simply be content with average bodies). We anticipate direct revenue losses in
2035 around $100–120 billion/year in the previously “shame-fueled” segments (diets, weight-loss drugs,
cosmetic fitness products). Indirectly, some industries benefit: healthier, happier people may reduce
healthcare costs (a societal gain, though a loss for companies selling expensive weight-loss surgeries or
pharmaceuticals for obesity perhaps). The advertising and media landscape also changes – less demand for
airbrushed fitness models, more for inclusive imagery (connected to advertising changes above). The
personal training profession may shift focus from aesthetics to functionality, which might slightly lower
demand for purely appearance-driven trainers. Overall, the economy adjusts: money once spent on
dubious quick-fixes might be spent on other leisure or saved. So while there’s a loss for those businesses
that preyed on body shame, consumer welfare could improve.
14
Assumptions: We assume naturism leads to greater body positivity for the majority, significantly reducing
the market for products and services that rely on making people feel bodily inadequate. The estimate of
~30% impact on weight loss industry by 2035 is speculative but based on the idea that a large subset of
dieters are motivated by appearance (not health), which naturism might alleviate. We also assume a portion
of fitness spending is purely aesthetic – that portion shrinks.
<table><tr><th>Shame-Based Fitness/Wellness Losses</th><th>Est. 2025</th><th>Proj. 2035</th></tr>
<tr><td>Diet/weight-loss industry loss</td><td>$40 billion (10–15% of ~$297B)
19
(20–30% below projected $590B)
19
</td><td>$100 billion+
</td></tr> <tr><td>Shapewear & slimming apparel</td><td>$4 billion
(majority of ~$5.5B)
21
</td><td>$5+ billion (market largely gone or static)</td></tr> <tr><td>Fitness clubs/
services</td><td>$10–15 billion (fewer vanity gym joins)</td><td>$20 billion (some persistent reduction)</
td></tr> <tr><td>Indirect impacts</td><td>Supplements down, fewer fad gadgets</td><td>Wellness focus
shifts (some sectors vanish)</td></tr> </table>
19
21
19
Sources: Global weight loss market $297B (2024) ; forecast $590B by 2033 . Shapewear ~$5.5B (2025)
. Estimates assume significant portion of these markets driven by appearance anxiety diminishes.
Conclusion: The adoption of naturism by 60% of people in developed countries would trigger far-reaching
economic shifts. Industries centered on clothing, beauty, and sexualized appeal would contract severely,
losing hundreds of billions in combined revenues. Downstream supply chains from cotton fields to
marketing firms would feel the impact, as would employment in those sectors. Some of these “losses”
correspond to reduced unnecessary consumption (with potential social or environmental benefits), while
others represent challenging economic dislocations (job losses in apparel manufacturing, etc.). Over a ten
year horizon, companies would adapt where possible – focusing on the remaining markets or pivoting to
new products – but many traditional business models (fast fashion, heavy cosmetics use, etc.) would
decline. These estimates rely on current market sizes and straightforward assumptions about consumer
behavior change; actual outcomes could vary based on cultural nuances (for example, if naturism increases
leisure travel to nude resorts, that could create new economic activity). Nonetheless, it’s clear that a
mainstream naturist movement would fundamentally reshape consumer priorities, leading to a
leaner fashion/beauty economy and a more body-positive, less commodified approach to lifestyle. The
f
igures provided illustrate the scale of direct and indirect economic effects, grounded in credible market
data and logical extrapolation from the naturist scenario.
1
4
15
16
6
Sources: The analysis above integrates data from industry reports and market research to quantify impacts,
including global market sizes for apparel , beauty , cosmetic surgery , adult entertainment ,
textiles , swimwear , lingerie , security services , and weight loss markets . These provide
the baseline from which percentage losses were estimated. Each industry section details specific
assumptions and uses citations for key figures.
17
7
9
19
1
2
3
Global Apparel Industry Statistics (2025) | UniformMarket
https://www.uniformmarket.com/statistics/global-apparel-industry-statistics
4
5
Textile Industry Size, Trends & Growth Forecast Report 2030
https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/global-textile-industry---growth-trends-and-forecast-2019---2024
15
6
State of Beauty industry trends 2025 | McKinsey
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/consumer-packaged-goods/our-insights/state-of-beauty
7
Cosmetic Surgery Market Size, Share | Industry Growth [2032]
https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/cosmetic-surgery-market-102628
8
Global Survey 2023: Full Report and Press Releases | ISAPS
https://www.isaps.org/discover/about-isaps/global-statistics/global-survey-2023-full-report-and-press-releases/
9
11
Adult Entertainment Market to Reach $96.2 Billion, Globally, by 2032 at 5.2% CAGR: Allied Market
Research
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/adult-entertainment-market-to-reach-96-2-billion-globally-by-2032-at-5-2-cagr-allied
market-research-301862924.html
10
How Big is the Porn Industry?
https://www.covenanteyes.com/blog/how-big-is-the-porn-industry/
12
US Charitable Giving Statistics [2023] - Reninc.com
https://www.reninc.com/charitable-giving-statistics/
13
Magazine trends study finds increase in advertisements using sex - UGA Today
https://news.uga.edu/magazine-trends-study-finds-increase-in-advertisements-using-sex/
14
50+ Advertising Statistics That Are Changing the Game [2025]
https://cropink.com/advertising-statistics
15
Swimwear Market Size, Share, Value | Trends Analysis [2032]
https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/swimwear-market-103877
16
Lingerie Market Size & Trends 2025-2035
https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/lingerie-market
17
Private Security Market Size, Share | CAGR of 9.2%
https://market.us/report/private-security-market/
18
School Uniform Statistics (2024) - UniformMarket
https://www.uniformmarket.com/statistics/school-uniform-statistics
19
Weight Loss Market Global Forecast Report 2025-2033: Personal Management Solutions, AI Powered
Apps, Wearables, and Expanding Options for Meal Replacement and Supplements
ResearchAndMarkets.com
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250124781715/en/Weight-Loss-Market-Global-Forecast-Report-2025-2033
Personal-Management-Solutions-AI-Powered-Apps-Wearables-and-Expanding-Options-for-Meal-Replacement-and
Supplements---ResearchAndMarkets.com
20
Health and Fitness Club Market Growth | Trends Analysis [2030]
https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/health-and-fitness-club-market-108652
21
Compression Wear and Shapewear Market Report 2025 - Size & Growth
https://www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/report/compression-wear-and-shapewear-global-market-report